NEW DELHI: The controversy surrounding CJI BR Gavai has intensified after his remarks during a hearing on the restoration of a 7-ft beheaded idol of Lord Vishnu at Khajuraho (Javari Temple) sparked massive outrage on social media. When a petitioner sought the restoration, CJI BR Gavai reportedly said: “Go ask your Lord Vishnu to do something. You say you are his staunch devotee, so go and pray.”
The comment drew sharp criticism, with many calling it disrespectful and insensitive. Social media users accused the Chief Justice of mocking faith. The backlash was immediate and widespread, creating a storm of debates around judicial conduct and religious sentiments.
Read more: When the Supreme Court Turns Against Faith: CJI Gavai, Ambedkarite Vows, and the Hindu Question
Responding to the controversy, CJI BR Gavai clarified that his statement had been “misportrayed” on social media. He emphasized, “I respect all religions.” Stressing that his words were taken out of context, the Chief Justice said he had no intention to hurt religious sentiments.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta also intervened, stating that the reaction was “disproportionate.” He compared the uproar to Newton’s law, remarking, “Every action now has a disproportionate social media reaction.”
Mehta further defended CJI BR Gavai, saying he had known him for over a decade and that the Chief Justice had visited religious places of all faiths.
Senior advocate Kapil Sibal, however, sparked another debate by commenting, “We suffer every day, it’s an unruly horse, no way to tame it,” in reference to the wave of social media reactions. His remark added fuel to the already heated discourse.
Despite the clarifications, neither CJI BR Gavai nor the Solicitor General issued an outright apology. Critics argue that a simple apology could have calmed the outrage, while supporters maintain that the Chief Justice’s clarification was sufficient.
The Lord Vishnu idol case, which concerns restoration of a historic sculpture in Khajuraho, has now become a flashpoint for broader discussions about respect for faith, judicial responsibility, and the power of social media in shaping public opinion.
As the controversy lingers, all eyes remain on the Supreme Court, with many questioning whether CJI BR Gavai’s clarification will ease tensions or whether the outrage will continue to simmer.
